Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

From:

Thufir Hawat

Subject:

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

Date:

Fri, 27 Feb 2009 05:50:53 GMT

User-agent:

Pan/0.132 (Waxed in Black)

On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 15:26:56 -0500, amicus_curious wrote:
> "Hyman Rosen" <address@hidden> wrote in message
>news:address@hidden
>> amicus_curious wrote:
>>> You ignore the rather obvious fact that Verizon is distributing binary
>>> code for the routers from its own website to anyone and everyone who
>>> wants it without regard to the requirements of the GPL that this
>>> binary code be accompanied by the source that created it.
>>
>> Whether Verizon is incurring a GPL obligation depends on the fine
>> details of what it is doing, and who is considered to be doing the
>> copying when a person clicks on a URL in order to obtain software.
>> Since the URL contains the string "actiontec gateway" it's plausible
>> that the Verizon webserver contacts an Actiontec gateway in order to
>> get the software to the clicker.
>>
> Not plausible at all. I am sure that Verizon obtained their copy of the
> binary files from Actiontec, but they are plainly sourced from the
> Verizon site.
Does the binary file which is being distributed reside on the verizon
server? If so, then Verizon would be required to make the source
available upon request from a customer. If the binary isn't on a Verizon
server then Verizon has no obligations is the argument.
The fact that there's a link on verizon.com which causes this binary to
download doesn't prove that the binary file is on a Verizon server.
-Thufir